I don't know if this has been mentioned in another thread, but I stumbled onto it, and found it interesting.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/nasa-confirms-impossible-space-drive-actually-works-revolutionize-space-travel/?utm_source=o1&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=o1

Steve

---

Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website

thanks SciManStev,

very interesting

looks like progress

This is either the most amazing discovery in physics since, well, ever, which will force the rewriting of kinematics and other branches... or it's "Cold Propulsion." More confirmation and testing required. But definitely thanks for the heads-up. :^)

Due to relativity's mass/energy equivalence, emission of EM has "kickback" and a photon drive would work in under our current understanding of physcics, but to the tune of 150 megawatts per Newton of force (as a minimum; twice that if not reflected.) The Chinese team claimed 720 millinewtons which should require 108 megawatts of power. I rather doubt it was that high!

---

Unless electrons have mass or they somehow disturb matter by inducing a momentum I think this experiment needs to be performed in a zero gravity enviorment like aboard the ISS.

The amount of thrust produced is so damn small that it would take a long long time to build up any momentum and silly things like gravitational influences might overcome such a miniscule thruster...

---

Never engage stupid people at their level, they then have the home court advantage.....

Let's wait and see if the experiment is debunked.

Electrons do have mass--very little of course.

What exactly is the claim in terms of a practical engine. Is it different or more practical than an atomic reactor spitting protons etc out of the exhaust??

The article, linked below, covers several questions that have been raised here, and much else about Shawyer's EM Drive, and does so in a readable, interesting manner.
The thrust that can be delivered is thought to be about 400 MilliNewtons per kilowatt. A superconducting version, it is believed, could be thousands of times more efficient.
There is no basis in standard physics theory to explain how this device can work. Various speculations on how it works have been proposed, but none has been substantiated.
That Shawyer's device produces inexplicable thrust has been confirmed directly by two independent sources, including NASA, and also in a different device using the same principle
Further confirmative testing is contemplated.
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2014-08/07/10-qs-about-nasa-impossible-drive

Reminds me of the Queller Drive from Space 1999..I know it's not the same thing, but I thought it sounded similar. Impossible thruster and all

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ik_EVr6lnU